A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Japanese AA Weapon?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 30th 03, 04:49 PM
Kenneth Williams
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Japanese AA Weapon?

Did the Japanese battleship Yamato ever fire an AA salvo during WW2?

A visiting friend of mine in the Navy told me the Japanese had a
battery-fired AA weapon that was actually fired in battle.

I guess it didn't work as the ship was sunk!

Anyone know what this weapon was?

I can't find anything on it online and my friend can't remember the
name of it.

Kenneth Williams
  #2  
Old October 30th 03, 05:35 PM
Keith Willshaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Kenneth Williams" wrote in message
...
Did the Japanese battleship Yamato ever fire an AA salvo during WW2?

A visiting friend of mine in the Navy told me the Japanese had a
battery-fired AA weapon that was actually fired in battle.

I guess it didn't work as the ship was sunk!

Anyone know what this weapon was?


From
http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNJAP_18-45_t94.htm

"As were most Japanese warships, the Yamato and Musashi were provided with a
special anti-aircraft incendiary shrapnel shell officially designated as
"Type 3 Common" but nicknamed "San Shiki" (The Beehive). This round weighed
2,998 lbs. (1,360 kg) and was filled with 900 incendiary tubes made out of
rubber thermite and 600 steel stays. A time fuze was used to set the
desired exploding distance, usually about 1,000 meters (1,100 yards). These
projectiles were designed to burst in a 20 degree cone extending towards the
oncoming aircraft with the projectile shell itself being destroyed by a
bursting charge to increase the quantity of steel splinters. The incendiary
tubes ignited about half a second later and burned for five seconds at 3,000
degrees C, producing a flame about 5 meters (16 feet) long. "

Keith


  #3  
Old October 30th 03, 08:34 PM
av8r
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi

The Yamato had the following weapons dedicated for the anti-aircraft role

Six pairs of 5 inch guns

Twelve pairs of 25 mm guns

Four pairs of 13 mm guns

Cheers...Chris

  #4  
Old October 31st 03, 12:20 AM
Gernot Hassenpflug
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Keith Willshaw" writes:

From
http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNJAP_18-45_t94.htm

"As were most Japanese warships, the Yamato and Musashi were provided with a
special anti-aircraft incendiary shrapnel shell officially designated as
"Type 3 Common" but nicknamed "San Shiki" (The Beehive). This round weighed


Correction to the quoted part: `san shiki' is merely Japanese for Type
3, the short form of the name of the shell. I could't find out what
the nickname was in Japanese, but beehive is `mitsuhachi no su', not
very catchy. In the past, `beehive' was also known as `hankyujo'
(lit. 'hemisphere-shape'), which sounds a lot more likely. Anyone
else know for sure ?

--
G Hassenpflug * IJN & JMSDF equipment/history fan
  #5  
Old October 31st 03, 05:24 AM
WaltBJ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I think I have identified the source of confusion here. The big guns
on the Yamato are referred to as 'the main battery'. This is a term
stemming from the old sailing ships. So when you hear someone casually
mention 'the main battery fired antiaircraft shells' one unfamiliar
with the term might assume a battery-activated antiaircraft gun. BTW
those San-Shiki shells were used but weren't effrective on aircraft.
They were also to be used to destroy merchant shipping should the case
arise. I suspect they also may have tumbled out of their racks and
detonated when the Yamato rolled onto her beam ends and blew the ship
in half. FWIW Bismarck also fired her main battery at the Lancasters
coming in to sink her on that last mission - but to no avail. Wonder
what it was like when the Tallboys came down. Richter 9?
Walt BJ
  #6  
Old October 31st 03, 05:45 AM
robert arndt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"Kenneth Williams" wrote in message
...
Did the Japanese battleship Yamato ever fire an AA salvo during WW2?

A visiting friend of mine in the Navy told me the Japanese had a
battery-fired AA weapon that was actually fired in battle.

I guess it didn't work as the ship was sunk!

Anyone know what this weapon was?


From
http://www.warships1.com/Weapons/WNJAP_18-45_t94.htm

"As were most Japanese warships, the Yamato and Musashi were provided with a
special anti-aircraft incendiary shrapnel shell officially designated as
"Type 3 Common" but nicknamed "San Shiki" (The Beehive). This round weighed
2,998 lbs. (1,360 kg) and was filled with 900 incendiary tubes made out of
rubber thermite and 600 steel stays. A time fuze was used to set the
desired exploding distance, usually about 1,000 meters (1,100 yards). These
projectiles were designed to burst in a 20 degree cone extending towards the
oncoming aircraft with the projectile shell itself being destroyed by a
bursting charge to increase the quantity of steel splinters. The incendiary
tubes ignited about half a second later and burned for five seconds at 3,000
degrees C, producing a flame about 5 meters (16 feet) long. "

Keith


As noted in the link Keith provided the Musashi ruined one of her 18
inch guns the very first time she fired the Sankaiden ammo. The AA
rounds weren't bore safe and Musashi's detonated prematurely.
It should also be noted that Sankaiden ammo was not just for use by
the Japanese big battleships. The ammo was introduced in 1942 starting
with 8 inch guns and moving up to the big 18s of Yamato and Musashi.
They were, however, not effective in any caliber and most damaged the
ship's guns that fired them.

Rob
  #7  
Old October 31st 03, 07:47 AM
Keith Willshaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...


FWIW Bismarck also fired her main battery at the Lancasters
coming in to sink her on that last mission - but to no avail. Wonder
what it was like when the Tallboys came down. Richter 9?
Walt BJ


I think you meant Tirpitz there.

Keith


  #8  
Old October 31st 03, 10:43 AM
Cub Driver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sounds a bit more sophisticated than putting up waterspouts!

As I recall, Yamato did sortie, so presumably it did fire some guns,
though that is hardly certain. It could have been a species of
proactive scuttling.


"As were most Japanese warships, the Yamato and Musashi were provided with a
special anti-aircraft incendiary shrapnel shell officially designated as
"Type 3 Common" but nicknamed "San Shiki" (The Beehive). This round weighed
2,998 lbs. (1,360 kg) and was filled with 900 incendiary tubes made out of
rubber thermite and 600 steel stays. A time fuze was used to set the
desired exploding distance, usually about 1,000 meters (1,100 yards). These
projectiles were designed to burst in a 20 degree cone extending towards the
oncoming aircraft with the projectile shell itself being destroyed by a
bursting charge to increase the quantity of steel splinters. The incendiary
tubes ignited about half a second later and burned for five seconds at 3,000
degrees C, producing a flame about 5 meters (16 feet) long. "

Keith


all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at
www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com
  #9  
Old October 31st 03, 10:46 AM
Cub Driver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Bismarck also fired her main battery at the Lancasters
coming in to sink her on that last mission


This actually was fairly common. There are many motion pictures
showing USN ships banging away in order to create waterspouts in front
of low-level kamikaze attacks. I should think that was often done
against torpedo bombers, who had to fly at low level.

(To be sure, that's different from firing AT the aircraft.)

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at
www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com
  #10  
Old October 31st 03, 10:51 AM
Cub Driver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Type 3 Common" but nicknamed "San Shiki" (The Beehive). This round weighed


Correction to the quoted part: `san shiki' is merely Japanese for Type
3, the short form of the name of the shell.


Adopted in the year 2603 of the Japanese throne.

As a means of identifying military gear, year-adopted is one of the
most confusing, especially with the pace of adoption in the war years.

The most famous example of this system, and the only one that has made
it into English, is the A6M "Zero" -- adopted in, you got it, 2600.

This was actually considered to be the *long* system. (The full &
proper name is Type Zero Carrier Fighter.) A6M is the short system,
and was adopted from the U.S. Navy: purpose - sequence number -
manufacturer.

www.warbirdforum.com/zero.htm



all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at
www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
russia vs. japan in 1941 [WAS: 50% of NAZI oil..] Military Aviation 136 December 6th 03 10:40 PM
OT- north korean nuke weapon plutonium - source? patrick mitchel Military Aviation 11 August 31st 03 04:01 AM
AIRCRAFT MUNITIONS - THE COBALT BOMB Garrison Hilliard Military Aviation 1 August 29th 03 09:22 AM
Japanese Army Navy Keith Willshaw Military Aviation 35 July 29th 03 03:22 AM
Rapists and Robbers have a New Weapon Bumper7 Aerobatics 0 July 17th 03 09:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.